Yours isn't a bad idea, though we don't want viewers to be bounced off the site to BoxRec, which has its own ratings. We have to be careful referring viewers to any other site anyway, since it would look like an endorsement. We have to remain independent and unconnected.

As it is now, we have two record-keepers in the membership (see the "members" tab on the site to find out who they are -and everyone else) who are monitoring fights world-wide, so the records are well-kept and up-to-date.

Expanding the site to keep exhaustive records of our own would be a redundant effort and a hard-sell.

Yours isn't a bad idea, though we don't want viewers to be bounced off the site to BoxRec, which has its own ratings. We have to be careful referring viewers to any other site anyway, since it would look like an endorsement. We have to remain independent and unconnected.

As it is now, we have two record-keepers in the membership (see the "members" tab on the site to find out who they are -and everyone else) who are monitoring fights world-wide, so the records are well-kept and up-to-date.

Expanding the site to keep exhaustive records of our own would be a redundant effort and a hard-sell.

yeah I see the quandry. I do like the idea of checking out records at the click of a button but you're right with the problems with endorsement and the redundancy of mimicking what they've already done.

yeah I see the quandry. I do like the idea of checking out records at the click of a button but you're right with the problems with endorsement and the redundancy of mimicking what they've already done.

There does seem to be a flaw with the rankings, though. For example, regarding the welterweight and heavyweight divisions, to crown a champion of the weight class requires the #1. (Floyd Mayweather Jr. and Wladimir Klitschko) to beat the #2 (Juan Manuel Marquez and David Haye, if Vitali retires and Haye still has his rating).

However, this would mean Floyd and Wladimir would be re-matching guys they've already thoroughly dominated.
There will likely never be re-matches so as long as Floyd and Wladimir remain on top, there may never be a Champion in the division.
I admire the consistency within the criteria, and there's no better way of deciding the champion than #1 vs. #2. Just saying.

Well, I wouldn't say it's a flaw so much as something of a necessary evil.

We could load the dice to make sure that the second-ranked guy is someone we'd like to see fight the top contender. But that sets us on the path to game-playing like the WBS organizations.

We could also allow the third-ranked contender in, but then we'd have to s**** the idea that a throne must be filled by the two best in the division. And that's the whole point. The charter is immovable on that point.

In short, the cures look more like curses.

Wlad rules a meadow right now, so a retread in Haye wouldn't be the worst of things -he fought Tony the Friggin Tiger twice for instance.

Marquez won't be around much longer and who knows what will happen when he fights Pac a fifth time. Hell, if he knocks him out again, I might like to see him fight a declining Floyd.

Rankings shift over time. We see no need to manipulate the rules to hurry things along; that's part of the problem. It's partly why we have 90 belts out there when there should be 17. Everyone is making the rules up as they go along to line their pockets. Meanwhile, boxing fans are being lied to every damn day.

For me, as a boxing historian/researcher, this points toward a critical motivation to move on this whole initiative back in May.

Boxing needs continuity with it's past. Boxing needs rankings that are globally-represented, solid, independent, and clean. To rely on the ratings of WBS organizations (or any organization that is similarly compromised), is just plain stupid.

Case-in-point (and one of thousands): Nikola Sjekloca got dominated by Sakio Bika Saturday night in a WBS "title eliminator." Sjekloca came in ranked #1 by that WBS. He is not in the top ten of the Transnational Boxing Rankings. Who's the donkey -them or us? Or boxing itself?

The problem isn't even the WBS. It's the big networks and the boxing press that insist -despite volumes upon volumes of corruption and lunacy over 50 years- on paying them tribute on the air and in print.